Children will pay the price for the House of Commons shameful vote for same-sex marriage

By Deacon Nick Donnelly, on February 5th, 2013

The House of Commons, by voting 400 to 175 for same-sex marriage, has committed another moral outrage against the natural law that underpins the law of this Christian country. This vote will go down in infamy alongside the votes legalising abortion, and experiments on embryonic human beings. And like these two immoral votes the most vulnerable group in our country will suffer – our children.

If this vote becomes law after the committee stages, and the vote in the House of Lords, this generation of children, and all future generations, will grow up in a country in which the true meaning and significance of marriage has been corrupted by institutionalised sin. If that isn’t bad enough, more children will also be denied their right to be loved and raised by mothers and fathers. This is a tragedy for them, and for our country.

Pope Benedict XVI spoke on the consequences for children when the complimentarity of maleness and femaleness:

From now on there is only the abstract human being, who chooses for himself what his nature is to be. Man and woman in their created state as complementary versions of what it means to be human are disputed. But if there is no pre-ordained duality of man and woman in creation, then neither is the family any longer a reality established by creation. Likewise, the child has lost the place he had occupied hitherto and the dignity pertaining to him. Bernheim shows that now, perforce, from being a subject of rights, the child has become an object to which people have a right and which they have a right to obtain. When the freedom to be creative becomes the freedom to create oneself, then necessarily the Maker himself is denied and ultimately man too is stripped of his dignity as a creature of God, as the image of God at the core of his being. The defence of the family is about man himself. And it becomes clear that when God is denied, human dignity also disappears. Whoever defends God is defending man.

22 comments to Children will pay the price for the House of Commons shameful vote for same-sex marriage

Government can create a bill and vote in favour with the majority to call a square a sphere. It does not change the truth and reality of what a square is, and that no matter what, a square can never be a sphere

It might not affect your marriage Andy, but it will affect how your children will view marriage – as something human-legislated and open to any redefinition as long as it is between consenting adults (and no animals are harmed).

Quite so, Andrzej. If a person takes it for granted that a marriage can exist between any two persons regardless of gender, then it won’t make sense to him to propose that two persons marry only if they irrevocably give to and receive from each other the exclusive right to engage together in acts which are of themselves apt for the generation of offspring. In that case, increasing numbers of people will think they are married when in fact they are not.

C4M DELIGHTED BY THE SCALE OF THE PARLIAMENTARY OPPOSITION TO REDEFINING MARRIAGE BILL

Responding to the news that 175 MPs voted against and a further 70 plus abstained, or were absent at Second Reading, Colin Hart, Campaign Director for Coalition for Marriage commented: “The scale of the opposition against the Government’s profoundly undemocratic plans is astonishing, and sends a clear message to the Prime Minister that he faces a lengthy and damaging battle to redefine marriage.

“Just a few months ago, if we had predicted this result, no one would have believed us, but our clear and simple message that these proposals are undemocratic and will lead to all sorts of unintended consequences has struck a chord with ordinary voters and now scores of MPs.

“We have consistently warned the legislation contains no safeguards for those who work in the public sector. Top lawyers, with a track record of winning against the Government, have said the quadruple lock is not sustainable and instead of trying to answer these questions the PM remains hell bent on ramming this bill through Parliament in a dangerously short period of time.

“Mr Cameron hopes that this matter is now settled. He is wrong. His attempts to distract those in his own party and the wider country from the fall out will fail. More importantly this is not the end of the fight against these ill-thought through and divisive plans. There are more votes in the Commons, more speeches, potentially dozens of amendments and then the bill will go to the Lords where the voting arithmetic is very different.”

andy: You miss the point as did so many in the debate. If you have a good marriage then SSM is not likely to affect you. But SSM sends out a message that marriage is no more than a loving relationship. If sexual infidelity is not an offence in an SSM then why should it be in heterosexual marriage? What do you think that message does for a marriage in difficulties? If children are just to be regarded as some sort of consumer goods which are optional and to be acquired by purchase in all sorts of peculiar ways what do you think the effect will be on children? Why get married at all?

However there is political angle to all this. More Conservatives voted against this measure than voted for it. Cameron’s position now has a large question mark over it. There may be a revolt unseating him. Such a division will almost necessarily lead to his losing the next election and then he will be done and England will be done for with a socialist government. We are in for interesting times.

I don’t miss the point at all. or rather I think your point isn’t a very good one. I would like my children to grow up learning that the important thing about marriage is love and commitment.

The problem with your point is that you start from the perfectly reasonable and true position that marriage is ideally a precursor to children and then take the leap to saying that children or their possibility ist be a precursor for marriage as if the loautomatically flowed both ways when it doesn’t.. there is no logic that means that children will be harmed by Sam sex marriage unless you think that straight couples will become less inclined to get or stay married once they no longer see that marriage is something spnd exclusively for them. My original point is that my marriage is special because of the love in it not because of the d it is just plai. Stupid to think that that love is threatened by someone else getting married

As the result of the vote was announced by the Commons tellers I felt as though my country had kicked me in the teeth. I now seriously think it is time to cast aside nationhood and geographical identity and just call ourselves Catholics – that is what we are and that is what we believe and no government of any political stance, no secular thinking can take that away from us – the divine truth!

I’ve long held the view that not paying taxes is fair enough, so long as:

* your drains and toilet outlet are blocked off
* the road leading to your drive is dug up
* you train, employ and pay your own doctor
* you produce your own power for heat and light
* you provide, traim and pay your own school teacher

Sadly we have no choice but to pay taxes – even when we know that our money is being spent immorally on things like killing unborn children or bombing innocent men, women and children in illegal and unjust wars.

However Jesus’ answer was not just about paying taxes. He said “Give to Caesar what belongs to Caesar – and to God what belongs to God.”

Unfortunately some of our politicans are self-made men who worship their creator.

The 175 will have made the memory of Ss Thomas More and John Fisher all the brighter and for those so-called catholics who toaded to the lure of appeasing Cameron and co look to your immortal souls; where will Davy, Boris and co be when you have to answer for this nights betrayal??? Repent, Repent!!!

Yes, our heartfelt appreciation should be extended to the 175 MPs who chose to support the institution of the family yesterday evening.

I must admit, if you’d have told me Sarah Teather’s name was going to be counted among the good souls, I’d have scarcely believed it. I was intending to have sent her an approving message on Twitter for voting against the legislation, but she appears to have closed down her account since this morning – needlessly to say, the braying and rabid secular beasts must have hounding her all day.

Yes a campaign for Real Marriage. Hopefully that would include a speaking out against remarriage after divorce, and against the use of donor sperm/ova for all people regardless of their martial status and sexual orientation. If not, such a campaign will be seen by many as just another form of gay bashing, masquerading as concern for children’s welfare.